Immigrants convicted of homicide: Exploring disparate sentencing outcomes

Throughout U.S. history, persistent negative stereotypes about immigrants have abounded in public discourse, leading to negative outcomes for people without U.S. citizenship across social and economic life. Stereotypes such as these are also known to impact the discretionary decision-making of judges in the sentencing phase of a trial, shifting punishment outcomes along racial, gendered, and age-related lines in ways that negatively impact minority offenders. This study explores whether the negative stereotypes surrounding immigrants may also be considered by judges, resulting in differential treatment for offenders based on citizenship. Using a 2018 dataset of offenders currently incarcerated in Texas Department of Criminal Justice facilities for homicide (N = 14,752), with sentencing dates going back to 1990 and accounting for citizenship of each offender, this study uses multinomial logistic regression to explore whether immigrants receive significantly different sentences as suggested by the focal concerns perspective. This study, using a composite measure of immigration and race, finds mixed support for the idea that immigration is a uniquely relevant predictor of disparate sentencing outcomes. While Hispanic immigrants are more likely to have received a shorter sentence than White citizens, Hispanic citizens also received shorter sentences, suggesting that race and ethnicity are more relevant than immigrant status. Support for focal concerns theory is found through an evaluation of other legally relevant and extra-legal variables. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.